PUBH6002_Assessment 1 Brief Page 1 of
6
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Title PUBH6002: Global and Environmental Health Issues
Assessment Assessment 1: Report - Environmental Risk Assessment
Individual/Group Individual
Length 1,500 words (+/- 10%)
Learning Outcomes A. Understand the concept of environmental factors influencing
health, and the relevance to public health from the global to
the local levels.
B. Describe key agencies, institutional structures, political
processes, influences on and challenges for environmental
health.
D. Understand the way in which globalisation and the social,
economic and political determinants of health influence
disease, including identification of vulnerable groups.
E. Understand the concept of sustainable development.
F. Identify and critique ethical elements relevant to
environmental health protections, policies, and industry
practices, from global to local scale.
G. Critically analyse the relationships between
environmental risk factors and social, economic and
political determinants of illness and injury from global
to local scale.
Submission Due Sunday following the end of Module 4 at 11:55pm
AEST/AEDT*
Weighting 30%
Total Marks 100 marks
*Please Note: This time is Sydney time (AEST or AEDT). Please convert to your own time zone (e.g.
Adelaide = 11:25pm).
PUBH6002_Assessment 1 Brief Page 2 of
6
Instructions:
Choose a specific geographic region and one of the following environmental health issues:
Water (safe drinking water or ambient/environmental water)
Sanitation (wastewater control)
Air quality (indoor or outdoor)
Solid waste management
Hazardous/toxic substances
Noise
Disasters
Food safety
Traffic accidents
Vector-borne disease
Climate and geography
Housing and the built environment
Please address the following:
Part 1:
Using the WHO XXXXXXXXXXDPSEEA framework: http:
www.who.int/wssd
esources/indicators/en/ -
Chapter 7
describe the driving forces, pressures, state changes, exposures and effects relevant to your
chosen region and environmental health issue.
Are there any social, political or economic influences on the issue that aren’t captured by
the DPSEEA framework?
Part 2:
How is the environmental health issue cu
ently being managed? What is the role of existing
health agencies and other agencies, key stakeholders including community groups, critical
infrastructure and legislative and regulatory measures at the federal and state level?
What suggestions do you propose to address gaps in cu
ent policy, regulation and
management for this environmental health issue?
http:
www.who.int/wssd
esources/indicators/en
PUBH6002_Assessment 1 Brief Page 3 of
6
Assessment Criteria:
Assignments will be assessed in terms of the extent to which students demonstrate:
Knowledge and understanding of evidence-based approaches to environmental risk
assessment and management (25%)
Critical analysis (30% in total)
o Critical analysis of the driving forces (economic, social, political, institutional,
developmental) behind the environmental determinants (10%)
o Critical analysis of the impact of the environmental risk upon the geographic
population (10%)
o Critical analysis of the impact of the environmental risk upon equity issues (10%)
Analysis of evidence to recommend changes in cu
ent policy, regulation and management
(25%)
General Assessment Criteria (20%)
o Provides a lucid introduction
o Shows a sophisticated understanding of the key issues
o Shows ability to interpret relevant information and literature in relation to
chosen topic
o Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts
o Shows evidence of reading beyond the required readings
o Justifies any conclusions reached with well-formed arguments and not merely
assertions
o Provides a conclusion or summary
o Co
ectly uses academic writing, presentation and grammar:
▪ Complies with academic standards of legibility, referencing and
ibliographical details (including reference list)
▪ Writes clearly, with accurate spelling and grammar as well as proper
sentence and paragraph construction
▪ Uses appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research
Marking Ru
ic:
Assessment
Attributes
0-34
(Fail 2 –
F2)
Unaccep
table
35-49
(Fail 1 – F1)
Poo
50-64
(Pass -P)
Functional
65-74
(Credit - CR)
Proficient
75-84
(Distinction – DN)
Advanced
85-100
(High Distinction –
HD)
Exceptional
Grade Description (Grading Scheme) Evidence of unsatisfactory
achievement of one or
more of the learning
objectives of the subject,
insufficient understanding
of the subject content
and/or unsatisfactory
level of skill development.
Evidence of satisfactory
achievement of subject
learning objectives, the
development of relevant
skills to a competent
level, and adequate
interpretation and critical
analysis skills.
Evidence of a good level of
understanding, knowledge
and skill development in
elation to the content of
the subject or work of a
superior quality on the
majority of the learning
objectives of the subject.
Demonstration of a high
level of interpretation and
critical analysis skills.
Evidence of a high level
of achievement of the
learning objectives of
the subject
demonstrated in such
areas as interpretation
and critical analysis,
logical argument, use
of methodology and
communication skills.
Evidence of an
exceptional level of
achievement of
learning objectives
across the entire
content of the course
demonstrated in such
areas as
interpretation and
critical analysis,
logical argument,
creativity, originality,
use of methodology
and communication
Exhibits knowledge and understanding
Knowledge and understanding of
evidence-based approaches to
environmental risk assessment and
management (25%)
Limited understanding of
equired concepts and
knowledge
Knowledge/understandin
g of the field or discipline.
Resembles a recall or
Thorough
knowledge/understanding
of the field or discipline/s.
Supports personal opinion
Highly developed
understanding of the
field or discipline/s.
skills.
A sophisticated
understanding of the
field or discipline/s.
summary of key ideas. and information Discriminates between Systematically and
Key components of the substantiated by evidence assertion of personal critically discriminates
assignment are not Often conflates/confuses from the research/subject opinion and between assertion of
addressed. assertion of personal materials. information personal opinion and
opinion with information substantiated by information
substantiated by Demonstrates a capacity robust evidence from substantiated by
evidence from the to explain and apply the research/course robust evidence from
research/subject relevant concepts. materials and the research/course
materials. extended reading. materials and
Page 4 of 6
PUBH6002_Assessment 1Brief Page 5 of
6
Well demonstrated
capacity to explain and
apply relevant
concepts.
extended reading.
Mastery of concepts
and application to
new
situations/further
learning.
Critical reasoning, presentation and
defence of an argument and/or position
Critical analysis of the driving forces
(economic, social, political,
institutional, developmental) behind
the environmental determinants (10%)
Critical analysis of the impact of the
environmental risk upon the
geographic population (10%)
Critical analysis of the impact of the
environmental risk upon equity issues
(10%)
Specific position
(perspective or argument)
fails to take into account
the complexities of the
issue(s) or scope of the
assignment.
Makes assertions that are
not justified.
Specific position
(perspective or
argument) begins to take
into account the issue(s)
or scope of the
assignment.
Justifies any conclusions
eached with arguments
not merely assertion.
Specific position
(perspective or argument)
takes into account the
complexities of the issue(s)
or scope of the
assignment. Others’ points
of view are acknowledged.
Justifies any conclusions
eached with well-formed
arguments not merely
assertion.
Specific position
(perspective or
argument) is expertly
presented and
accurately takes into
account the
complexities of the
issue(s) and scope of
the assignment.
Justifies any
conclusions reached
with well-developed
arguments.
Specific position
(perspective or
argument) is
presented expertly,
authoritatively and
imaginatively,
accurately taking into
account the
complexities of the
issue(s) and scope of
the assignment.
Limits of position are
acknowledged.
Justifies any
conclusions reached
with sophisticated
arguments.
Analysis and application with synthesis of
new knowledge
Analysis of evidence to recommend
changes in cu
ent policy, regulation
and management (25%)
Limited synthesis and
analysis.
Limited
application
ecommendat
ions based upon analysis.
Demonstrated analysis
and synthesis of new
knowledge with
application.
Shows the ability to
interpret relevant
information and
literature.
Well-developed analysis
and synthesis with
application of
ecommendationslinked
to analysis/synthesis.
Thoroughly developed
and creative analysis
and synthesis with
application of
pretested models and /
or independently
developed models and
justified
ecommendations
linked to
analysis/synthesis.
Highly sophisticated
and creative analysis,
synthesis of new with
existing knowledge.
Strong application by
way of pretested
models and / or
independently
developed models.
Recommendations
PUBH6002_Assessment 1Brief Page 6 of
6
are clearly justified
ased on the
analysis/synthesis.
Applying knowledge
to new
situations/other
cases.
General assessment criteria (20%)
*General assessment criteria shown below
Poorly written with e
ors
in spelling, grammar.
Demonstrates
inconsistent use of good
quality, credible and
elevant research sources
to support and develop
ideas.
There are mistakes in
using the APA style.
Is written according to
academic genre (e.g. with
introduction, conclusion
or summary) and has
accurate spelling,
grammar, sentence and
paragraph construction.
Demonstrates consistent
use of credible and
elevant research sources
to support and develop
ideas, but these are not
always explicit or well
developed.
There are no mistakes in
using the APA style.
Is well-written and
adheres to the academic
genre (e.g. with
introduction, conclusion or
summary).
Demonstrates consistent
use of high quality